Sub-Saharan Africa: Debt

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In which sub-Saharan African heavily indebted poor countries are civil society groups and parliaments playing a significant role in poverty reduction strategies and in monitoring the impact of debt relief payments.

Baroness Amos: In order to qualify for debt relief under the heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) initiative, governments lead participatory processes to develop poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs), involving civil society and the international community. To date, parliaments have not played a significant role in these processes, but there are increasing signs of parliamentary interest and involvement. DfID supports this development because the PRSP approach ensures that the money saved from debt servicing is spent on health, education and other development projects.
	Of the 23 sub-Saharan African countries that have qualified for the HIPC initiative, 19 countries (Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Ethiopia, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia) all have full PRSPs in place. The remaining four countries (Democratic Republic of Congo, Sierra Leone, Guinea Bissau and Sao Tome and Principe) have presented interim PRSPs to the World Bank and IMF boards.

International Development Association: Financing

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How the United Kingdom and other G8 countries make up the shortfall in International Development Association financing as a result of reduced loan payments.

Baroness Amos: Reduced loan payments arise as a direct result of the increased use of grants in the International Development Association (IDA). Reduced loans or increased grants have two associated costs. The first is the lost income from the repayment of the loans that would have been made in the place of grants (the lost reflows), and the second is the lost administrative charges on IDA loans. For grants agreed during the thirteenth replenishment of IDA (IDA 13), the UK has supported a proposal, whereby lost administrative charges would be compensated through upfront contributions made by donors, and lost reflows would be compensated as and when these would have fallen due on a pay-as-you-go basis.
	In IDA 14, the issue of compensating IDA for the cost of grants will arise again, as grants are expected to remain an important funding instrument for IDA. Further proposals for grant compensation are being put forward by World Bank staff, and these will be discussed during the replenishment negotiations. A key objective for the UK will be to secure an agreement which recognises the importance of ensuring the long-term financial integrity of IDA.

Speed Cameras: Installation Criteria

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether occurrences of fatal accidents are amongst the criteria for the installation of speed cameras at a particular accident location; and, if so, what number of such accidents warrants the installation of a speed camera.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The rules for the safety camera cost recovery scheme require partnerships to use the guideline of four accidents resulting in people being killed or seriously injured over the previous three years at sites they propose to enforce using cameras.

Passenger Franchises

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which passenger franchises include a significant revenue risk to the franchisee.

Lord Davies of Oldham: All franchisees normally have revenue risk. The exception is where circumstances have required a full management contract to be put in place. Currently this applies only to First North Western services.

British Transport Police

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why it is necessary for the British Transport Police to have its headquarters in central London; and what are its current requirements for additional office space in London.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The British Transport Police has confirmed that the force, with its national responsibility for policing of the railway system, has a strong operational requirement for its headquarters, including strategic command and central support activities, being centrally located with fast and easy access to the principal hubs of the rail infrastructure, and in close proximity to key stakeholders in both the rail industry and government. Uniquely London meets such operational requirements.
	BTP would face substantial costs associated with any relocation away from central London, and such costs would far outweigh any revenue benefits of alternative locations and could not be supported in terms of value for money.
	The force is reviewing its future accommodation requirements in the light of the possible need to vacate its current HQ offices at Tavistock Place when the lease expires at the end of 2005. The extent of any replacement accommodation will be a matter for early consideration by the new British Transport Police Authority.

UK Sport: Modernisation Programme

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 11 March (WA 194), whether they intend to continue underspend in UK Sport's modernisation budget for the national governing bodies of sport in each of the three years of the project; and
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 11 March (WA 194), whether they will provide a breakdown of the underspend for UK Sport's modernisation budget detailing how much money was carried forward for the modernisation programme and returned to the Treasury.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The underspends to budgets in each year were as follows:
	
		
			 Year £ 
			 2001–02 839,700 
			 2002–03 2,029,800 
			 2003–04 1,620,000 
		
	
	Under the end-year flexibility scheme none of this was returned to the Treasury.
	UK Sport's business plan for 2005–09 has yet to be approved and as a result the budget for the modernisation programme remains to be agreed. UK Sport has no intention to underspend on the modernisation programme in each of the next three years.

Sport: Funding

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will announce which United Kingdom sports eligible for high performance funding are to be financed at a devolved level, and which at a United Kingdom level.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: There is no change to the responsibilities for funding that were outlined in Game Plan. The main complexities were for the UK national governing bodies of sport receiving significant funding for programmes in support of their performance pathway from both UK Sport and Sport England and the subsequent monitoring and evaluation of that investment.
	There were also complexities for athletes of the same performance standard on the pathway receiving different levels of financial support from home country sports councils.
	There are constructive discussions currently under way between UK Sport and Sport England, in the first instance, aimed at addressing the NGB programme issues. In addition, all the sports councils are committed to making joined up funding decisions in support of one stop plans and so inconsistencies should be eliminated over the next Olympiad.

Sport England and UK Sport

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the annual rent for the offices of Sport England and UK Sport in London; what is the length of the respective leases; and when the next break clauses, if any, take effect.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The annual rent for Sport England's London offices is £1,116,000; the length of the lease is 15 years, and the next break clause takes effect on 29 September 2007. The annual rent for UK Sport's office is £750,000; the lease is a commercial 15 year lease with no break clauses.

Sport England and UK Sport

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they plan to relocate any UK Sport functions from London to Loughborough; if so, which functions; and when the relocation will take place.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Sir Michael Lyons conducted a review of the scope for relocating public sector jobs outside of London and the south-east. His report, published in March 2004, indicated that DCMS had identified a number of possible relocations, one of which was UK Sport.
	Discussions are on-going with UK Sport about the implications of this proposal, but there has been no decision concerning the relocation or timing of such a move.

Development Land: Central Government

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much land is held by government departments, the National Health Service and other public institutions; and what proportion could be made available for house building.

Lord Rooker: Estimates of previously developed land in England that may be suitable for development (brownfield land) are available from the national land use database of previously developed land for 2002. An estimated 13,000 hectares were owned by central government and other public sector bodies, excluding local government. Of these about 6,000 hectares were judged by the local authorities to be potentially suitable for housing, with a capacity of 160,000 dwellings. These figures include both previously developed land and buildings that are vacant or derelict and land currently in use identified by local authorities as having potential for redevelopment.
	Following the publication of the Sustainable Communities Plan (Feb 2003) the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, through English Partnerships, set up a register of surplus land held by central government and its agencies. Any department proposing to dispose of land which is surplus to its own operational requirements now has to place that land on the register for a period of 40 working days before the land is marketed. This procedure gives the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, English Partnerships or other departments the opportunity to express an interest in acquiring the land to take forward its own policy objectives, before it is marketed to the private sector. In April 2004 land on the register covered over 2,700 hectares.

Homeless Households

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many homeless people lived in rural areas for each of the years 1999–2003.

Lord Rooker: Information collected about local authorities' actions under homelessness legislation is in respect of households, rather than persons. Estimates of the number of households accepted as eligible for assistance, unintentionally homeless and in a priority need category, in local authority districts classified by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister as rural, are tabled below.
	
		Households accepted by local authorities as eligible for assistance, unintentionally homeless and in priority need: England
		
			  1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 
			 Rural authorities 14,950 16,890 17,420 19,320 20,850 
			 Urban authorities 90,630 97,790 100,390 110,750 116,150 
			 All local authorities 105,580 114,670 117,810 130,070 137,000 
		
	
	Notes:
	Totals may not equal sum of components because of rounding
	Source:
	ODPM P1E homelessness returns (quarterly)

Homeless Households

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many temporary-accommodated households there were in rural areas in the years 1995–2003.

Lord Rooker: Information on the number of households living in temporary accommodation provided by local authorities under homelessness legislation as at the end of each quarter is collected by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Estimates as at 31 March of each year, in local authority districts classified by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister as rural, are tabled below.
	
		Homeless households in all forms of Temporary Accommodation as at 31 March: England
		
			  1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 
			 Rural authorities 3,460 4,270 5,230 6,060 7,030 7,860 8,390 8,270 
			 Urban authorities 37,780 43,240 51,340 59,110 68,170 72,580 81,010 89,020 
			 All local authorities 41,250 47,520 56,580 65,170 75,200 80,440 89,400 97,290 
		
	
	Notes:
	Households in accommodation arranged by local authorities pending enquiries or after being accepted as homeless under homelessness legislation. Data prior to 1997 are not available on a comparable basis. Totals may not equal sum of components because of rounding.
	Source:
	ODPM P1E homelessness returns (quarterly).

Stoke Heath Young Offender Institution

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will establish a public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death of Joseph Scholes in Stoke Heath Young Offender Institution in March 2002, as recommended by the coroner.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The coroner has written to my right honourable friend the Home Secretary, commenting on a number of issues arising from the inquest. We are considering his comments and will reply in due course. We will make known our response by means of a Ministerial Statement.

Young Offender Institutions: Search Procedures

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether Prison Service contracts with other agencies running young offender institutions contain checks on the use of strip search and physical restraint procedures.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: All but one young offender institutions are run by HM Prison Service; HMYOI Ashfield is privately managed. Other establishments, including other privately managed prisons, accommodate young adult offenders as a proportion of their population. All establishments holding young adult offenders, including those which are privately managed, are subject to the Young Offender Institution Rules 2000, of which Rule 42 covers searching and Rule 52 covers restraints. All of these establishments keep records on the use of strip search procedures and physical restraint procedures.

Prisons: Offending Behaviour Courses

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether a prisoner who refuses to attend a faith-based offending behaviour course for reasons of conscience is in any way disadvantaged; and whether prisons offering no alternative to such a course will notify prisoners in writing that they will not be disadvantaged; and
	What instructions they have provided to the Prison Service to ensure that a prisoner who is required to attend an offending behaviour course as an essential precondition of his parole but declines to attend a faith-based course for reasons of conscience is offered a transfer to a prison which (a) runs an equivalent non-faith based course; (b) is equally convenient for visitors; and (c) allows him to continue with any course of study he is undertaking.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: There are no faith-based offending behaviour programmes for prisoners accredited by the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel (CSAP). Some prisons do run faith-based courses accredited by other recognised bodies and open to all prisoners, for example on victim awareness, but no prisoner should be disadvantaged for refusing to attend such a course for reasons of conscience. Where there are good reasons why a prisoner cannot participate in a particular recommended activity, this should be recorded in the sentence plan.
	It is open to the prisoner to seek a transfer to another prison running a similar non faith-based course. Current guidance requires governors to consider regime and family contact issues before moving prisoners and, whenever possible, to avoid moving prisoners if it disrupts their participation in an educational course or treatment programme or their consideration for parole. However, where a prisoner is identified as needing work, treatment or education programmes, which are not available at their current location, they may be moved to another appropriate prison; subject to available vacancies at that establishment.
	There are no essential pre-conditions of parole that require a prisoner to attend an offending related course. It is, however, a mandatory requirement that reports of any offence related courses attended are included in a prisoner's parole dossier. The Parole Board, an independent non-departmental executive body, determines parole and the Prison Service has no input into the parole decision process.

Asylum Seekers: Democratic Republic of Congo

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will suspend the removal of failed asylum seekers from the Democratic Republic of Congo who were resident in Bukavu.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: As with applications from all nationalities, each asylum (and human rights) claim made by someone from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is considered by the Home Office on its individual merits, in accordance with our obligations under the 1951 UN Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Individual asylum seekers from DRC found by both the Home Office and the Independent Appellate Authority not to be at risk of persecution and not in need of humanitarian protection are considered for removal on a case by case basis.
	All returns of failed asylum seekers from DRC are to Kinshasa only. In the current circumstances, we see no need to suspend returns of failed asylum seekers who originate from or have been resident in Bukavu.

Motoring Offences

Viscount Simon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many notices of intended prosecutions for motoring offences which were issued in 2002 were abandoned and not pursued to convictions.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Data on notices of intended prosecutions are not collected centrally within England and Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland.

British Citizenship Applications

Lord Tope: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the current backlog of applications received for British citizenship since January 2004.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The amount of nationality work in progress fluctuates. The only published figures are the numbers of decisions made annually.

British Citizenship Applications

Lord Tope: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps are being taken to clear the backlog of applications received for British citizenship since January 2004, to enable local registration services to plan and prepare regular ceremonies.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Officials from the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) are working closely with representatives from the local authorities to ensure a steady throughput of citizenship decisions to allow adequate planning and preparation for ceremonies. Additional resources will be allocated to meet an increase in the number of applications being submitted.

British Citizenship Applications

Lord Tope: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When local authorities will begin to receive regular payments for the British citizenship ceremonies which they have already undertaken.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Payments are made to local authorities when they acknowledge receipt of certificates for presentation at ceremonies. There have been difficulties in meeting the agreed 14-day target for making payments, which are now being addressed. Arrangements have been made with busier local authorities for more frequent payments.

Asylum Seekers: Somalia

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in the light of recent reports of armed conflict in several parts of Somalia, they will suspend the enforced return of Somalian failed asylum seekers.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: All Somali asylum and human rights applications are considered by the Home Office on their individual merits, in accordance with our obligations under the 1951 UN Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Each application is considered against the background of the latest available information about the situation in the country of origin. These sources include intergovernmental organisations, governmental sources and human rights organisations.
	We recognise that conditions in Somalia are such that there are individuals who are able to demonstrate a need for international protection. But we do not accept that each and every individual who presents himself as an asylum seeker from Somalia has a protection need and should automatically be allowed to remain in the UK.
	Individual asylum seekers found by both the Home Office and the Independent Appellate Authority not to be at risk of persecution and not in need of humanitarian protection are considered for removal on a case by case basis. The Home Office will not return vulnerable groups and will enforce the return only of those Somalis it is satisfied are not in need of protection.

Immigration: Leave to Remain

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many persons already in the United Kingdom applied for leave to remain:
	(a) when they were within an existing leave to remain; and
	(b) when they were overstayers,
	on the basis of their marriage or intended marriage to a British citizen, a European Economic Area national or a person with indefinite leave to remain, in each of the five years 1999–2003; and in each case, how many were refused leave to remain.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The latest available data on the number of people that have received extensions of their existing leave to remain in the United Kingdom can be found in the table.
	
		Decisions on applications for an extension of leave to remain(1) in the United Kingdom and settlement(2), by category, excluding EEA nationals, 1999–2002 -- United Kingdom
		
			 Category Number of decisions Percentage refused 
			  1999 2000 2001 2002 1999 2000 2001 2002 
			 All decisions 178,810 249,920 277,375 337,650 2.4 4.5 5.6 5.5 
			 Of which: Fiancé(e)s 45 95 85 100 23.3 24.5 22.4 22.4 
			 Spouse (probationary year applications)(3) 16,555 27,645 24,910 19,235 1.6 4.5 7.4 3.8 
		
	
	(1) Excludes dependants of principal applicants, asylum related decisions, the outcome of appeals and withdrawn applications.
	(2) Excludes "in line" dependants and the outcome of appeals.
	(3) Data include unmarried partners.
	Data on whether an application for leave to remain was made after existing leave had expired is not available.
	Data for the number of residence documents issued to non-EEA spouses of EU nationals is not available for the period requested.

Asylum Seekers: Zimbabwe

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will ensure that persons claiming to be supporters of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) are correctly assessed; and that any person who has falsely made a claim to be a member or supporter of the MDC is returned to Zimbabwe.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: All asylum seekers are rigorously screened to test the credibility of their claimed identity, nationality and travel route to the United Kingdom. If a Zimbabwean applicant claimed to be a member or supporter of the MDC, in the substantive asylum interview the caseworker would address the credibility of the applicant's account, and any documentation produced, by testing their knowledge of the MDC, their commitment to the party, the nature and extent of alleged persecution, and whether the applicant could produce corroborative evidence to support their claim. Whilst there may be similarities between claims, each one is different and the line of questioning will reflect the individual nature of the claim.
	The current policy of not generally enforcing the return of failed asylum seekers to Zimbabwe makes provision to enforce the return of those whose presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good.

European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their total annual expenditure on funding the United Kingdom secretariat for the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Government's total expenditure for the UK secretariat for 2003–04 was £66,858.

European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to withdraw funding support for the United Kingdom secretariat for the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia; and, if so, what are their reasons for this decision.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Government will cease funding the UK secretariat on 30 June 2004. Unlike her predecessor, the new UK member of the European Monitoring Centre (EUMC) management board does not carry the significant extra duties of chair of the management and executive boards of the EUMC. She therefore does not have the same need for a support office in London as her predecessor. The centre in Vienna is now fully up and running and able to provide practical support to board members, unlike when the secretariat was established. Furthermore, the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) is currently developing a European strategy and is becoming more engaged with European processes—a fact which is inevitably leading to a duplication of activity between the CRE and the secretariat which the Government cannot justify funding. This decision was taken after careful consideration and in no way represents any reduction in the UK Government's commitment to the EUMC or to the fight against racism at national or European level.

Private Security Industry

Lord Ouseley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What support they will provide to companies in the private security industry to become compliant with operational standards and practices considered to be in the public interest; and
	Whether they are satisfied with the regulation of the private security industry; if not, what measures they intend to introduce; and when those are likely to be introduced and become effective; and
	Whether there is adequate access for private security companies to appropriate information about current and future employees in the interests of improving their screening requirements; and
	When the licensing of security officers will begin; and who, among staff of private security companies, will be included.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Under the Private Security Industry Act 2001 (PSIA), we have put in place measures for the effective regulation of the industry. The Security Industry Authority (SIA) will license people to work in various sectors of the industry. These arrangements will be introduced in phases. Licensing of door supervisors commenced in the pilot area of Hampshire and the Isle of Wight in March of this year, and will roll out across England and Wales over the next 10 months. Licensing of door supervisors will be followed later this year by that of vehicle immobilisers, with the manned guarding sector (security officers) and key holders in early to mid-2005, although no set dates have yet been confirmed. The final sector to be subject to regulation will be that of security consultants and private investigators in 2006.
	Anyone involved with work of a security guarding nature will require a licence, and the PSIA makes provision for employees, employers, managers, supervisors and directors of security companies to be licensed.
	The authority's procedures include three checks on people applying for licences:
	an identity check of the licence applicant,
	a criminal record check at standard disclosure level through the Criminal Records Bureau, which includes information about all convictions—including any that are spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act—cautions, reprimands and warnings recorded centrally on the Police national computer, and
	a check on professional competence to do the job.
	As to companies engaged in the industry, the authority's voluntary approved contractor scheme (ACS), is expected to come into effect from the summer of 2005. The ACS will provide consumers and industries with an assurance that what is being accredited is competent, committed to quality and adheres to professional standards. The scheme will allow the SIA to guide and facilitate the industry, and ensure that it is focused on internal performance standards and quality of delivery.
	The principal objective of the measures is to raise performance standards in the industry, thereby promoting increased public trust and confidence and assist in nurturing development opportunities.

Euro 2004: Football Banning Orders

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people were subject to football banning orders at the start of the Euro 2004 championships; and how many of these surrendered their passports to the police prior to the start of the tournament.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Two thousand two hundred and fifty-three individuals were subject to football banning orders at the start of the Euro 2004 European football championships. The Football Banning Orders Authority (FBOA), which has statutory responsibility for monitoring compliance with passport surrender and other conditions, advises that all banning order subjects have complied with the exception of 43 individuals whose non-compliance is subject to police checks. There was extensive police monitoring of England fans en route to Portugal and transit countries. No subject of a banning order was found attempting to leave England and Wales.

Access to Goods and Services: Draft European Directive

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their view on the draft European directive on equal treatment between men and women with regard to access to goods and services, particularly the right of individuals to ask to be seen by healthcare professionals of a particular gender.

Lord Warner: The Government broadly support the draft European directive on equal treatment between men and women in access to and the supply of goods and services. We do, however, have concerns about the proposals on insurance and pensions, exemptions and the extent to which the directive may place obligations on service recipients as well as service providers. The European Commission is continuing to negotiate with member states regarding the directive.
	The Government are committed to making National Health Service services more responsive to patients, by offering more choice across the spectrum of health care. In future, patients' personal preferences will be expressed in the choices that they make, and this may include choosing the gender of the clinician that they wish to see. The ability to choose the gender of clinician may be of particular importance to people of some faiths where questions of decency may arise. The United Kingdom is seeking to ensure that the final form of the directive will enable a patient to express preferences about the gender of their clinician. The negotiations are continuing, however, and, at this stage, we are not in a position to predict the outcome on this issue.

Human Rights

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Filkin on 7 June (WA 12–13), whether the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights are individual or group rights.

Lord Filkin: The convention rights set out in Schedule 1 to the Human Rights Act 1998 apply to all legal and natural persons within the United Kingdom. In order to bring proceedings against a public authority for an action or actions which are rendered unlawful by Section 6(1) of the Act or to rely on convention rights in any legal proceedings, the complainant must be (or would be) the victim of the alleged unlawful act.

Equality Legislation

Lord Ouseley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the benefits for the people of Great Britain of not having a Single Equality Act.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Legislation to ensure greater equality of opportunity is a priority for this Government, as is demonstrated by the improvements we have already made and the range of actions we are taking.
	Since 1997 the Government have introduced new legislation outlawing discrimination in employment on grounds of sexual orientation, religion and belief (and in due course age); strengthening existing legislation on disability discrimination; strengthening the Race Relations Act including introducing a duty on public bodies to promote race equality and publication of a draft Disability Discrimination Bill, which will further extend rights and opportunities for disabled people. We are also continuing to improve the workings of the Equal Pay Act and the Sex Discrimination Act, for example, through the introduction of the equal pay questionnaire and through action to streamline the complex rules of procedure relating to equal value tribunal cases. Further major steps are in progress or planned.
	The Government do not however believe that a complete legislative overhaul is the right way forward at this time.
	The Government's priority now is legislation to establish the Commission for Equality and Human Rights as detailed in the White Paper Fairness for All which was published on 12 May. We expect that the new commission will play a full and active part in the debate on the future development of equality legislation as part of its proposed power to keep such legislation under review.

Energy: Global Consumption

Lord Howell of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What studies they have made of the increase in global primary energy consumption in 2003, as reported in the British Petroleum Statistical Review 2004; in particular the increase in (a) world oil consumption; (b) world natural gas consumption (outside the United States of America); and (c) world coal consumption.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government continuously monitor developments in world energy markets by using a number of sources to inform their assessment of changes in global energy consumption (and production), although they have not themselves commissioned any studies that look specifically at global energy demand in 2003. The rise in global primary energy consumption in 2003 was primarily a result of the global economic recovery, and, in particular, economic development in emerging economies (notably China). The Government recognise the challenges brought about by such growth. Therefore, as outlined in the 2003 Energy White Paper, "Our energy future—creating a low carbon economy", the Government are working with developing countries to encourage more effective management of energy demand, through energy efficiency improvements and the development of renewable sources of energy.

Iraq: Human Rights and Humanitarian Law

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they have taken since the occupation of Iraq to ensure that (a) members of the Armed Forces and other United Kingdom personnel and persons employed by contractors there comply with international human rights and humanitarian law; (b) there are effective safeguards and sanctions against abuse whether by torture or other forms of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; and (c) there are effective remedies for any victims of such abuse.

Lord Bach: Members of the United Kingdom Armed Forces and contractors are liable under both UK and international law for their conduct while on operations in Iraq. As such, military personnel are fully informed of their responsibilities and obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law, not only through training received prior to deployment, but also through specific standard operating procedures. All UK military personnel deploying to Iraq receive an aide-mémoire card on the law of armed conflict which clearly states that prisoners, detainees and civilians must be treated with dignity and respect, and must not in any way be subject to abuse, torture or inhuman or degrading treatment.
	Any breaches in the law are usually also offences against service law, and are tried under service discipline Acts, but may also be tried under ordinary criminal law, which includes the Geneva Convention Act 1957 and the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (which gives effect to the torture convention). Likewise, contractors would also be tried under ordinary criminal law if they were found to have abused Iraqis. However, contractors are not directly involved in the apprehension or detention of Iraqis.
	There is a mechanism in place by which Iraqi citizens who claim to have been abused by members of the UK Armed Forces can make a claim. Such claims are handled in accordance with the direction of the Coalition Provisional Authority—specifically Section 6 of CPA order number 17. This states that:
	"Third party claims including those for property loss or damage and for personal injury and death or in respect of any other matter arising from or attributing to Coalition personnel or any persons employed by them, whether normally resident in Iraq or not, and that do not arise in connection with military combat operations, shall be submitted and dealt with by the Parent State whose coalition personnel, property, activities or other assets are alleged to have caused the claimed damage, in a manner consistent with the national laws of the Parent State".
	Hence, we would generally make payments in circumstances where the claim would give rise to a legal liability under English Law. Payments by other coalition partners is a matter for them.

Armed Forces: Training Costs

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the cost on average to the Armed Forces per recruit undergoing basic training.

Lord Bach: The Ministry of Defence currently does not have a unified approach for costing the discrete components of individual training across the three services. Work is under way to develop a consistent methodology for costing training outputs across defence.